Fight over ban on abortion procedure will continue past federal law signing

Published: Sunday, June 15, 2003

Associated Press

NEW YORK (AP)  On one main point, there is agreement: Congress and President Bush are about to enact the first federal law prohibiting an abortion procedure, a milestone in the fight over legalized abortion.

Almost every other aspect of the Partial-Birth Abortion Ban Act  even its title  is bitterly disputed. That's going to continue even after the measure becomes law, though the venue will switch from Congress to court.

Supporters have used words like "barbaric" and "abhorrent" in seeking to outlaw abortions during which the fetus is partially delivered before being aborted. Their principal target is a procedure used mainly for second-trimester abortions in which a fetus's legs and torso are pulled from the uterus before its skull is punctured.

The ban's opponents, including abortion-rights groups and the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists, say "partial-birth abortion" is a political term, not one in standard medical terminology.

They say the bill is a poorly worded and dangerous intrusion by politicians into medical practice, and that it would deter physicians from using procedures that are  in some cases  the safest form of abortion.

"By what right does Congress get involved in telling doctors how they should practice medicine?" asked David Grimes, a North Carolina physician who formerly headed the abortion surveillance division of the federal Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

He says support for the ban was based more on "aesthetics"  graphic physical descriptions of abortion procedures  than on medical principles.

The ban won Senate approval in March and House backing June 4, with some moderate Democrats joining Republicans in supporting the measure. President Clinton twice vetoed similar bills, but Bush has promised to sign this measure when it reaches him, probably this summer.

"It's important that you have two-thirds of the Congress saying this thing has gone too far," said Douglas Johnson of the National Right to Life Committee. "They were confronted with one specific manifestation of abortion in America and they recoiled from it."

The procedure most clearly targeted by the ban is referred to by medical organizations as "intact dilatation and extraction"  or D&X. The number of D&X abortions performed annually in the United States is estimated at 2,200 to 5,000, out of 1.3 million total abortions.

Audrey Eisen, a 35-year-old Virginian who underwent a D&E in February, fears the ban would deprive other women of a recourse she and her doctor considered appropriate after her fetus was found to have a severe chromosomal disorder. The fetus was likely to die in utero or live just a few weeks.

"It's a very tough issue. Because it's tough, it's no place for the government to be making the decision," said Eisen, whose abortion came in the 16th week of pregnancy.

Bush says the ban "will help build a culture of life in America." The measure's House sponsor, Rep. Steve Chabot, R-Ohio, said the targeted procedure is a "a barbaric practice ... untested, unproven, and potentially dangerous."

About 30 states have enacted versions of partial-birth bans, but most have been lost court challenges.

The most important ruling came in Carhart's case in 2000, when the U.S. Supreme Court voted 5-4 to strike down a Nebraska law similar to the proposed federal ban. The court said Nebraska's law was unconstitutional because it did not provide an exception to protect the health of the mother, and was unclear as to what procedures were banned.

The federal legislation added new language in attempt to be more specific. It allows an exception when the life  but not the health  of the mother is at risk. A doctor violating the law could face two years in prison.

Once Bush signs the ban, abortion-rights groups plan to seek a court injunction barring it from taking effect. The case could end up in the Supreme Court.